Abstract

: Participatory Budgeting aims to increase democracy in city districts by permitting citizens to participate in the spending of public budgets and in the making of important decisions regarding public life. Until today, such participation was made available mostly through physical meetings organized by public administrations (off‑line meetings). Only in recent years has software been developed in order to enable people to ‘gather’ using ICT methodologies (on‑line meetings). The paper describes this research project aimed at building a framework able to increase citizen participation in public life by developing new approaches, including the integration of off‑line and on‑line meetings among citizens and public administrations. Project eDem1.0, coordinated by the municipality of Rome and financed by the Italian Ministry for Innovation during the period March 2007 to February 2009, has aimed to apply cutting edge Internet‑based technologies (social networking, user‑generated content, etc.) to enhance the processes of participation and consultation, both between citizens and government administration offices, as well as among such offices themselves. Sociological studies, expressly conducted by the Universities of Pisa and Rome, have provided the basis for the innovative means developed in the project (normative solutions and choices, new useful software instruments, project self‑evaluation). The software platform, based on a social network structure, for implementation of such goals was developed for the most part at the ISTI Institute of the CNR in Pisa. Such development has been guided by the specific needs and wishes of the coordinating institution, to which a customized version has been provided. Initial testing of the software was begun within the framework of the Rome Bilancio Partecipativo del Municipio XI (Participatory Budgeting for District 11). The current version is a freely available, open‑source solution. Other, customized versions have been provided to and used by the region of Lazio and the township of Pescara.

Editorial

Ships that Pass in the Night?

For some years now I have been involved in the PhD symposium at the European Group for Public Administration’s (EGPA’s) annual conference. The majority of the PhD students attending these symposia are doing their research in public administration rather than e‑government, but sometimes ICT raises its head in unexpected situations.

This happened a few weeks ago at this year’s conference in Bucharest when a student was presenting some of the ongoing results from the COCOPS project. Don’t worry about the acronym (www.eur.nl/cocops/ if you want to know more), COCOPS is an EU funded project which, inter alia is trying to evaluate the impact of various public sector reforms. In the presentation in question, the student discussed and analysed various attempts to evaluate the impact of New Public Management (NPM) on public administration and citizens over the period from about the early 1990s to the present.

This coincides, give or take a year or two, with the period of the Internet and the Web in government. So in the discussion afterwards I could not resist asking the obvious question: how are you (or COCOPS) going to differentiate the effect of NPM (or any other reform over this period) from the impact of technology? This led to a lively discussion at the end of which there was no clear answer – possibly because distilling out such impacts is next to impossible.

The question of evaluating the impact of e‑government is one for another day. My observation here is that the student, and one assumes that COCOPS team (and a very distinguished bunch they are), did not seem to have given this matter much, if any, thought. Given that Eric Brynjolfsson is on record as claiming that almost all of the productivity gains in the US economy over the past 20 plus years are attributable to information technology, it seems a bit well, quixotic, to ignore the impact of the same technology in the public sector. Quixotic maybe, but surprising no. The world of public administration, or at least the academic end of it, is still, seemingly, largely oblivious of IT. In fact the previous week at the eGov conference in Delft when I remarked at an IFIP meeting that the Oxford Handbook of Public Management had only two chapters which considered IT at all (and one of those was on IT in government by Helen Margretts) a leading American academic (whose identity I will protect though he has tenure) snorted on contemptuously that that was because public administration academics were still 30 years behind in their thinking.

A bit over the top maybe, but there a germ of truth in this accusation as there is in the sometimes heard counter accusation that too many people working in e‑government do not know enough about mainstream public administration, its concepts, theories and ideas. A small number academics bridge this divide and many of them are to be found at EGPA each year, but it is a gap that really needs to be addressed by both sides. Both public administration and e‑government worlds have much to learn from each other and if they could, there world would be the richer for it.